Immunity for telecoms upheld!!!

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

RightIsWrong

Diamond Member
Apr 29, 2005
5,649
0
0
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: BoberFett

If the cop that told you to break into your neighbor's house said he'd shoot you in the leg if you didn't, would you still refuse? Sure there's a consequence for not complying, but if you refused you wouldn't have any civil or criminal liability so that makes everything OK and shooting you is really no big deal. At least he didn't shoot you in the head.

This is an issue I can see both sides on. The telcos could have and should have refused, but how exactly are people supposed to stand up to the federal government.

Well the threat of severe injury or death isn't exactly comparable here because... of... well the obvious reasons. I see what you're trying to get at though.

I won't doubt for a second that the telecoms were put in a shitty position by the government. They were probably threatened with a loss of contracts, no doubt. They had a choice though, lose contracts with no legal liability, or commit a crime, keep the contracts, and expose themselves to massive liability. They made their bed, it's not our fault if they sleep poorly in it.

I just don't buy the argument at all that says "the government would have withheld contracts so the companies had to do it". No, they didn't have to do it. We need to go after the people in government who are responsible for this, but we also need to uphold the law against the companies that aided and abetted this. If we let them off the hook this time, all that means is that the next time the government comes up to them and asks them to break the law, they will do it again that time too.

If we don't hold the government responsible for their illegal wiretaps it's likely there will be a next time they ask someone to break the law for them.

I completely agree.

However, we are able able to hold the telecoms responsible right now and they lose some major lawsuit, the next time the government comes knocking, it is going to take a lot more than a request to get the companies/industry to comply with it.
 

thraashman

Lifer
Apr 10, 2000
11,063
1,464
126
Originally posted by: Specop 007
Originally posted by: cliftonite
Originally posted by: Specop 007
Good.

How? You are adamant about your right to bear arms (with which I have no problem with) but ae willing to let other consitutional rights be trampled?

Absolutely not. I value each and every single Right we have.

HOWEVER. I do NOT think private business should be held accountable for questionable actions by our government. THAT is as great a travesty in my eyes as the government not recognizing our Rights.

I both agree and disagree with this statement. I think that by allowing lawsuits we're penalizing companies for not standing up for the rights of the customers they serve. If I ran a company like that I'd have told them to give me a warrant or go away. If they persisted ... well the press exists for a reason.

I am a heavy proponent that the entire administration involved in this should be impeached and imprisoned as this steps far beyond the bounds of legality.
 

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,929
142
106
Originally posted by: Specop 007
Originally posted by: eskimospy
What the holy hell are you talking about? If two people break the law, you hold both of them accountable because they are both at fault. If I ask you to go kill someone for me and you do it, the cops shouldn't ignore what you did just because I was the one that asked you.

The telecom companies knowingly, purposefully, and repeatedly violated federal law in order to help the government illegally spy on American citizens. You want to ignore this because the government was the one that asked them to commit these thousands of felonies. To do that is a blatant disregard for the rule of law.

What if its the Chief of Police or the Mayor asking you to commit the crime......Things get a bit more complicated because if you dont you could be framed for doing it anyways!
Yes, and it's the fearful chickensh!t mentality that you, and the CEO's of these corporations hold as they live in fear of our government. Mission accomplished indeed.

What you fail to realize is that once the telco's are prosecuted, that opens the door to retroactively prosecuting the criminals (this administration) once they're out of office. That will never happen now because this amendment didn't go through.
 

marincounty

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2005
3,227
5
76
Interesting that congressional Republicans could impeach a president over lying about a blow job, but have no interest in impeaching a president that illegally spies on Americans-a felony.

Yeah, it's all the democrats fault for not prosecuting the telecoms that carried out the illegal spying for the Republican administration.

Where are all of these Republicans that are so concerned about the rule of law?
 
Dec 10, 2005
23,990
6,793
136
If anyone is curious to see who voted for cloture on the issue: http://www.senate.gov/legislat...0&session=2&vote=00167

They don't have the final vote up yet, but you can get it here when it does go up: http://www.senate.gov/legislat...0&session=2&vote=00168

Telecom companies should not have been granted immunity. They could have said no to the government's initial request and just told them to go through the appropriate channels (get a warrant) - just look at Qwest. Lawsuits against the telecom companies might be the only way that we, the people, would get the full-insight into what the Bush Administration was really doing. What is wrong with letting a court decide if a lawsuit has merit?

And as a side note, why are all these people that are huge for gun rights, like anti-registration (since registration is a step away from confiscation) have no problem trusting the government when it comes to granting immunity from lawsuits or listening to your phone calls?
 

OrByte

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2000
9,302
144
106
HAHAHAHA

according to the link above

McCain didn't vote.

That is truely bad form, the press should ask him why he didn't vote. Its a pretty hot button topic, Im sure he has a good reason lined up.

Obama voted for the Bill (I am NOT pleased at all about that) he also voted for the amendment to remove the immunity language.

the Amendment lost. I'd like to see how the Amendment issue played out too.
 

Vette73

Lifer
Jul 5, 2000
21,503
8
0
Originally posted by: OrByte
HAHAHAHA

according to the link above

McCain didn't vote.

That is truely bad form, the press should ask him why he didn't vote. Its a pretty hot button topic, Im sure he has a good reason lined up.

Obama voted for the Bill (I am NOT pleased at all about that) he also voted for the amendment to remove the immunity language.

the Amendment lost. I'd like to see how the Amendment issue played out too.

McCain just wants to take a poll so he only has to change his answer 3 times not 5 on this issue liek the rest. :laugh:
 

2Xtreme21

Diamond Member
Jun 13, 2004
7,045
0
0
If Specop wasn't being a complete and utter douche in this thread, this post might be to commend him on his logic. The telco's should not be held accountable for the sheer reason that the issue would then stop with them. I want every fucking sleeze in Congress (demoncrat, repuglickan, what have you) as well as every member of the Bush administration to be waterboarded for life in Gitmo for allowing this blatant disregard of our constitutional rights to continue for as long as it did.
 

Specop 007

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2005
9,454
0
0
Originally posted by: 2Xtreme21
If Specop wasn't being a complete and utter douche in this thread, this post might be to commend him on his logic. The telco's should not be held accountable for the sheer reason that the issue would then stop with them. I want every fucking sleeze in Congress (demoncrat, repuglickan, what have you) as well as every member of the Bush administration to be waterboarded for life in Gitmo for allowing this blatant disregard of our constitutional rights to continue for as long as it did.

Umm....Yeah, thanks......
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,717
47,406
136
Originally posted by: 2Xtreme21
If Specop wasn't being a complete and utter douche in this thread, this post might be to commend him on his logic. The telco's should not be held accountable for the sheer reason that the issue would then stop with them. I want every fucking sleeze in Congress (demoncrat, repuglickan, what have you) as well as every member of the Bush administration to be waterboarded for life in Gitmo for allowing this blatant disregard of our constitutional rights to continue for as long as it did.

I can't for the life of me understand this logic. How does suing the telecom companies impede going after government officials in any way whatsoever? If anything, allowing the telecoms to be sued would provide MORE ammo for attacking government agents who conspired to violate FISA. The bill as it is... is simply a whitewash. Because this crap is being passed, nothing will happen to any of these companies, and nothing will happen to any of the people who participated in/created the warrantless wiretapping program.
 

MadRat

Lifer
Oct 14, 1999
11,909
229
106
Congress approved moving hundreds of thousands of Japanese-Americans to concentration camps in the 40's and the Supreme Court later kicked their ass for it because the Constitutional rights of those individuals was infringed. If you can prove your rights were violated then there is absolutely no reason one cannot sue the government regardless of a congressional rubber stamp of approval.
 

2Xtreme21

Diamond Member
Jun 13, 2004
7,045
0
0
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: 2Xtreme21
If Specop wasn't being a complete and utter douche in this thread, this post might be to commend him on his logic. The telco's should not be held accountable for the sheer reason that the issue would then stop with them. I want every fucking sleeze in Congress (demoncrat, repuglickan, what have you) as well as every member of the Bush administration to be waterboarded for life in Gitmo for allowing this blatant disregard of our constitutional rights to continue for as long as it did.

I can't for the life of me understand this logic. How does suing the telecom companies impede going after government officials in any way whatsoever? If anything, allowing the telecoms to be sued would provide MORE ammo for attacking government agents who conspired to violate FISA. The bill as it is... is simply a whitewash. Because this crap is being passed, nothing will happen to any of these companies, and nothing will happen to any of the people who participated in/created the warrantless wiretapping program.

There's a much greater chance that the government will be held accountable now than before where the government would turn every telco provider into scapegoats and wash their hands of the situation, while continuing to violate our freedoms.

Edit: And don't paint me as a hick-talkin, gun-lovin, jesus-fearin conservative either... I'm as left as they come-- though I'm not blinded by the here-and-now. This will ultimately be for the better (or so we can hope).
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,717
47,406
136
Originally posted by: 2Xtreme21

There's a much greater chance that the government will be held accountable now than before where the government would turn every telco provider into scapegoats and wash their hands of the situation, while continuing to violate our freedoms.

Edit: And don't paint me as a hick-talkin, gun-lovin, jesus-fearin conservative either... I'm as left as they come-- though I'm not blinded by the here-and-now. This will ultimately be for the better (or so we can hope).

How will the government be held accountable? Through what mechanism?
 

MadRat

Lifer
Oct 14, 1999
11,909
229
106
Originally posted by: BoberFett
This is an issue I can see both sides on. The telcos could have and should have refused, but how exactly are people supposed to stand up to the federal government.

The greatest people in history have moved nations to change when they took a stand. Where would India be without Gandhi? Where would America be without George Washington? Where would Scotland be without William Wallace? One person with impeccable fortitude can make a difference no matter how grim the odds.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,717
47,406
136
Originally posted by: MadRat
Congress approved moving hundreds of thousands of Japanese-Americans to concentration camps in the 40's and the Supreme Court later kicked their ass for it because the Constitutional rights of those individuals was infringed. If you can prove your rights were violated then there is absolutely no reason one cannot sue the government regardless of a congressional rubber stamp of approval.

Totally right, and I bolded the part where we're now totally screwed. The ways you tend to get documents out of the government are either by FOIA requests, or by suing them and compelling their disclosure during discovery. In order to prove your rights were violated, you are likely going to need those documents that the government is keeping. Now, the judiciary is required to dismiss all of these lawsuits, so no discovery.

It's all a wonderful cycle of total unaccountability.
 

2Xtreme21

Diamond Member
Jun 13, 2004
7,045
0
0
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: 2Xtreme21

There's a much greater chance that the government will be held accountable now than before where the government would turn every telco provider into scapegoats and wash their hands of the situation, while continuing to violate our freedoms.

Edit: And don't paint me as a hick-talkin, gun-lovin, jesus-fearin conservative either... I'm as left as they come-- though I'm not blinded by the here-and-now. This will ultimately be for the better (or so we can hope).

How will the government be held accountable? Through what mechanism?

That sure will be the tricky part, unfortunately. Hopefully we can get the sleezebag politicians we elected to grow a pair of balls and finally take issue with what its constituents have endured for the past 7 years.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,717
47,406
136
Originally posted by: 2Xtreme21
Originally posted by: eskimospy

How will the government be held accountable? Through what mechanism?

That sure will be the tricky part, unfortunately. Hopefully we can get the sleezebag politicians we elected to grow a pair of balls and finally take issue with what its constituents have endured for the past 7 years.

But these same people you elected were the ones that were complicit in this. (Congress included) Your alternative to holding companies accountable for crimes (felonies actually) that they committed is the vague hope that the politicians who were responsible for this will turn around, get religion, and indict themselves down the line somewhere? This is what you want to trade holding corporations to the rule of law for? I'm sorry man, but that's insane.
 

OrByte

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2000
9,302
144
106
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: 2Xtreme21
Originally posted by: eskimospy

How will the government be held accountable? Through what mechanism?

That sure will be the tricky part, unfortunately. Hopefully we can get the sleezebag politicians we elected to grow a pair of balls and finally take issue with what its constituents have endured for the past 7 years.

But these same people you elected were the ones that were complicit in this. (Congress included) Your alternative to holding companies accountable for crimes (felonies actually) that they committed is the vague hope that the politicians who were responsible for this will turn around, get religion, and indict themselves down the line somewhere? This is what you want to trade holding corporations to the rule of law for? I'm sorry man, but that's insane.
qft

with telecomm immunity the issue is basically null/void for retroactive legal processes.

By prosecuting the telecomms the justice system gets to open up the "can o worms" and then we get the opportunity to see exactly whom in government is responsible for this mess, a mess that our administration has been covering up for years now and only recently has had to do the legal limbo with the court system and a democratic congress.

With a retroactive immunity in place, I dont see this getting any easier to prosecute anyone.